More on this book
Community
Kindle Notes & Highlights
Read between
April 21 - May 11, 2020
Nonetheless, the text gives no indication that David felt any inner remorse.
David summarized the episode this way in a message sent to Joab: “Don’t let this upset you; the sword devours one as well as another” (2 Sam 11:25).
according to the honor/shame system of David’s day, the matter was resolved.
Everyone is satisfied except the Lord.
Even so, God worked through the honor/shame system to bring David to repentance.
God is not stymied by culture. God had introduced another element into ancient Near Eastern culture: a prophet. Instead of a voice whispering to his heart, a prophet shouted at his face. Either way, God speaks. Since David’s culture used shame to bring about conformity, God used shame to bring David to repentance.
Bloqueado, detenido
In fact, it seems there are plenty of people against whom David has sinned.
David was within his cultural rights. He broke no laws. Well, he did break one: “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife” (Ex 20:17 kjv). David had transgressed God’s laws, not his country’s. Thus, when he says, “against you, you only, have I sinned,” David is admitting that he is accountable not only to the expectations for a king but that he is also accountable to God.
God does not consider the matter closed just because David and the rest of the Israelites might.
God is capable of working through all cultural systems and expectations to bring sinners to repentance.
So does God work through shame-based or guilt-based methods? We think the answer is both.
It is also interesting that Bible characters often appeal to God’s honor to get him to act on their behalf.
Moses makes a two-pronged argument to persuade God to change his mind: (1) think about what the Egyptians will say about your name; and (2) you swore on your name and you don’t want to get a bad name! Moses doesn’t appeal to God’s sense of justice (“it wouldn’t be right”) but to his sense of honor (“you will be shamed”):
Although Plato predates the New Testament, his influence had not yet shaped Palestinian culture. It was still an honor/shame society.
foibles
Debilidades
For Paul’s first-century hearers, though, this news would have brought them to their knees. This judgment is described as a public honor/shame event. (God has the time to judge us all privately and individually, if he so intended.)
He is warning them that although they might not currently feel guilty about their sin, there will come a day when they will be publicly shamed for their misdeeds before God and everybody.
In the ancient world, there was only so much honor to go around—it was a limited good. Everyone was scrambling for more. Jesus’ opponents understood this well. Public questions were never for information. If one wanted information, you asked privately, as we often see Jesus’ disciples do (Mt 24:3; Mk 9:28).
public questions were contests. The winner was determined by the audience, who represented the community. If you silenced your opponent, you gained honor and they lost some.
Jewish officials
had been challenging Jesus publicly (Mt 12:1-7, for example), and every time they “lost,” they lost honor.
They need to publicly disgrace Jesus in order to get their honor back.
They need him executed as a criminal. This honor stuff is pretty serious. Some Middle Easterners still kill over honor.[19]
It is within this context that we must understand the fact that Jesus encouraged his disciples to be humble:
For Easterners, you would be shamed in front of everyone. In Jesus’ day, the loss of honor affected all areas of life. Arranged marriages might need to be reshuffled: perhaps your son isn’t worthy of his daughter after all.
What is the possible application, for example, of a story that simply records the bad behavior of its characters?
when the narrator was waving it in front of our faces. In the outrageous story in Judges 19 of the Levite and his concubine, we likely misread many parts.
The man repeatedly shamed the woman’s family by taking her from her parents but never giving her a full marriage (vv. 1-3) and later insulted her father’s hospitality (v. 10).
what the man had feared would happen in Jebus, a non-Israelite town (v. 12), actually happened in an Israelite town. Israelites were not being their brother’s keeper; they were no longer considering each other to be family (vv. 15, 22). They were not looking out for each other. When the story concludes (v. 30), everyone who saw it was saying to one another, “Such a thing has never been seen or done, not since the day the Israelites came up out of Egypt. Just imagine! We must do something! So speak up!” (Judg 19:30).
It is more likely that bystanders are expressing outrage over the fragmented state of Israel. If they won’t stand together and defend each other, they will end up as chopped apart as that poor woman.
The story is included to illustrate how bad things have become among God’s people, to show the dire need of the people’s return and the Lord’s intervention.
we need to be sensitive to the language of honor and shame in Scripture if we hope to learn how to live faithfully as Christians.
In Ephesians 4:1, the apostle calls his listeners to “live a life worthy of the calling you have received” (see also 2 Thess 1:11). The word worthy should alert us that honor/shame language is being used. In the verses that follow, Paul mentions specific behaviors that fall in this category.
The thought that should guide our conduct is that we are representatives of both Christ and the community that bears his name.
We deceive ourselves when we think sin is individual and independent of a community’s honor.
Paul thought otherwise. He considered sin yeast that influenced the whole batch of dough (1 Cor 5:6).
when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you,
In this case, what went without being said in Paul’s day was that communities were “permeable.”[20] What we mean is that bad things could soak into people (and groups).
Paul warned the church about the same thing. If you allow this “infection” in the Christian fellowship, it will spread.
The actions of some have dishonored the entire community.
Their actions were shaming the church of God and therefore God was defending his honor (Mal 1:6-7)!
Sin is corporate; it permeates the whole body. We don’t like to think that way, but it’s true. It leavens the whole lump and the honor of us all is at stake.
a couple cannot go to see the pastor without everyone knowing a visit occurred.
a couple is very unlikely to go to see the pastor until the entire village knows.
When neighbors tell the couple, “You two are arguing and need help,” then they become aware of relationship problems. It is the village’s problem.
You’ll begin to see honor/shame language in the Bible when you are more familiar with the concept.
If an event or conversation is taking place publicly, there’s a good chance that honor/shame is at stake, such as in the story of Ruth and Boaz.
Nicodemus and the disciples were asking sincere questions, while the religious leaders were trying to trap Jesus. That’s true. But context indicates motive. Private questions were not honor challenges. Public questions were.
the Bible views life holistically. A lack of integrity in any part of a ship’s hull is still a risk of breach; it doesn’t matter if it is the port or the starboard side.
Sin is never really private.
